A collaborative project between the Florida Department of Education and the University of South Florida FloridaRtI.usf.edu

Welcome! Presenters Michael Curtis, Co-director - Florida’s PS/RtI Project Heather Diamond – Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services (BEESS) Clark Dorman, Project Leader - Florida’s PS/RtI Project Panel Members Amelia VanName Larson, Student Services Supervisor and District PS/RtI Facilitator– Pasco County School District Monica Verra, Director of Exceptional Student Education – Pasco County School District Elizabeth Bondy, Professor, School of Teaching and Learning - University of Florida Patty McHatton, Director of Project Expertise- University of South Florida Daphne Thomas, Chair of Department of Special Education - University of South Florida

Overview of the Day Morning Session FLDOE Perspective on PS/RtI The PS/RtI Model: Conceptual Foundation, Practical Issues in Application, Implementation Issues, Knowledge and Skills Needed for Success; The Florida Problem Solving/Response to Intervention Project Lunch (on your own)

Overview (cont’d) Afternoon Session School District Views of PS/RtI: Implementation Issues, Knowledge and Skills Needed by Personnel Already in the Field and those Entering the Workforce University Perspectives from General and Special Education – Preparing Personnel for PS/RtI; Where We Are vs Where We Need to Be; Potential Barriers to Getting There; Potential Strategies Questions and Answers, Discussion  

Overview (cont’d) Within University Small Group Discussion Where are you in preparing for PS/RtI? Where do you need to be? What are significant barriers to getting there? Next steps: strategies to reduce and/or eliminate barriers. Report Out from Small Groups, Large Group Discussion, and Wrap Up

Advance Organizer for Morning Florida’s Response to Intervention: Application in General and Special Education The PS/RtI Model: Conceptual Foundation Practical Issues in Application/Implementation Issues, Knowledge and Skills Needed for Success The Florida Problem Solving/Response to Intervention Project

Outcomes of State Efforts Introductory RtI TAP disseminated on March 3, 2006; can be accessed at: http://www.fldoe.org/ese/pdf/y2006-8.pdf Collaboration and Emphasis on General Education Involvement/Leadership Problem-Solving/RtI Florida Project is accessible at: http://floridarti.usf.edu/ PS/RtI – Teaching Learning Connection (TLC): academic focus Positive Behavior Support: behavior focus State-wide PS/RtI Implementation Plan Relevant Rule Revisions: E/BD, Proposed Administrative, Draft SLD, Draft LI

PS/RtI Integrates Efforts Florida Department of Education PS / RtI

State-Level Collaborators Bureau of School Improvement, FLDOE Just Read, Florida!, FLDOE Florida Center for Reading Research, FSU LD Research Project, FSU PS/RtI Pilot Project, USF RtI-TLC Project, UCF Positive Behavior Support Project, USF Student Support Services Project, USF FL Center for Research – STEM, FSU Office of Math and Science, FLDOE Bureau of Exceptional Student Education and Student Services, FLDOE Reading First Professional Development, RFPD Family Network on Disabilities of Florida, FND Florida Educators Association, FEA

What does the State Plan do? Provides an overview of Florida’s perspective and approach to RtI. Connects and integrates terms and concepts with existing initiatives. Specifies foundational beliefs about how to create ideal conditions to promote student achievement. Calls for active engagement of parents. Discusses positive impact on school improvement, student achievement, and disproportionate representation of minority populations in special education programs.  

What does the State Plan Do? Specifies State and District responsibilities in the scaling-up process. Outlines the state team infrastructure. Policy leadership team Implementation team Advisory group Reports current and future activities. Suggests flexible funding considerations. Applies to English language learners (ELL). Applies to Special Education eligibility. Contains links to resources and related efforts to assist the reader in next steps.

Tools to Support Efforts District/School Self-Assessment Tool Guidance for District/School Planning On-line Training Module(s): Introductory course housed at USF Currently used by pre-service students in counseling, school psychology & social work Will soon be accessible to all

National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005 What is RtI? RTI is the practice of (1) providing high quality instruction/intervention matched to student needs and, (2) using level of performance and learning rate over time to (3) make important educational decisions to guide instruction. National Association of State Directors of Special Education, 2005

Core Principles of RtI A process designed to maximize achievement for all students Frequent data collection on student performance Early identification of students at risk Early intervention (K-3) Multi-tiered model of service delivery Research-based, scientifically validated instruction/interventions Ongoing progress monitoring - interventions evaluated and modified Data-based decision making - all decisions made with data Focused on outcomes

Response to Intervention is Not: About the identification of LD An instructional program. It is a framework to make decisions about instructional needs based on student data A way to avoid special education placement A hoop to jump through to ensure Sp. Ed. placement Intended to promote or encourage placement for students Intended to focus only on students who are below expected levels of proficiency Possible to implement alone; it is a cooperative effort of teachers, administrators, and support staff

What’s it look like? What does it do? Characteristics of a Building with RtI a. Frequent data collection on students in critical areas b. Early identification of students at risk c. Early intervention (kindergarten) d. Interventions evaluated and modified (if necessary) frequently e. Tiered levels of service delivery f. All decisions made with or verified by data Outcomes of RtI a. Improved rate of academic and behavior performance b. Significantly reduced disproportionality c. Reductions in special education referrals and placements

Big Ideas

Ideas What We Used to Think What We Now Know Educational disability results from the complex interaction between curriculum, instruction, the environment, and learner characteristics. Thorough understanding of the intrapersonal (within person) causes of educational disabilities is the most critical factor in determining appropriate treatment. Educational needs vary widely within and across disability categories Persons within disability categories have similar educational needs that are different in educationally important ways from persons in other disability categories. Aptitude by Treatment interactions (ATIs) have not been proven. Auditory Learners Auditory Reading Methods Visual Visual Reading Kinesthetic Reading Matching treatments to underlying characteristics will result in maximally effective interventions.

Traditional vs. Response to Intervention J J Intervention L Intervention L Consider ESE Traditional- J Monitor Progress I put some more animation on this slide. Must be in regular presentation mode to view it. J Monitor Progress Intervention L Consider ESE If necessary Regular Education Intervention L J Intervention 19 Response to Intervention-

Systemic v. Individual Student Problem How we got here… Teacher Recognizes Problem Referral for Psychoeducational Evaluation Psychoeducational Evaluation Conducted Intervention Brainstorming Intervention Brainstorming Eligibility Determination Data Analyzed To Determine Systemic v. Individual Student Problem Note the examples of two separate systems. The top line exemplifies our current continuum or “process” for addressing the needs of struggling learners. There is no true mention of assessment based on the previously discussed principles. It highlights brainstorming for possible interventions, only to result in testing for the purpose of eligibility…Remember, in this instance testing is done for the purpose of obtaining a score… The bottom continuum demonstrates how assessment is woven into the fabric of this process. Teams use assessment data from the very beginning by examining available data from screening measures. Analysis is conducted and additional assessments are administered as deemed appropriate. Intervention is designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated. Assessment has a role in each of these activities. Should the need still exist, as determined by the PS team, determination of disability characteristics may be indicated. In the event eligibility is declared, the child is delivered to the door of special education with the knowledge of what and how to instruct the student. Teacher/ School Level Screening Recognizes Problem Disability Characteristics Determined Monitoring of Response to Intervention Monitoring of Response to Intervention Discovery of Student Need Informed Intervention Intervention Revision Eligibility Determination Assessment 20

A Shift in Thinking The central question is not: “What about the students is causing the performance discrepancy?” but “What about the interaction of the curriculum, instruction, learners and learning environment should be altered so that the students will learn?” This shift alters everything else Ken Howell

We Need A New Logic Begin with the idea that the purpose of the system is student achievement Acknowledge that student needs exist on a continuum rather than in typological groupings Organize resources to make educational resources available in direct proportion to student need David Tilly 2004

Three Tiered Model of School Supports: Example of an Infrastructure Resource Inventory Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Tier III: Comprehensive and Intensive Interventions ( Few Students) Students who need Individualized Interventions Tier III: Intensive Interventions ( Few Students) Students who need Individual Intervention Tier II: Strategic Interventions (Some Students) Students who need more support in addition to the core curriculum Tier II: Targeted Group Interventions (Some Students) Students who need more support in addition to school-wide positive behavior program Arrows = movement in tiers is fluid (up, down, around) Tier I: Core Curriculum All students Tier I: Universal Interventions All students; all settings 23

Three Tiered Model of School Supports: Example of an Infrastructure Resource Inventory Academic Systems Behavioral Systems Tier 3: Comprehensive and Intensive Interventions Individual Students or Small Group (2-3) Reading: Scholastic Program, Reading,Mastery, ALL, Soar to Success, Leap Track, Fundations Tier 3: Intensive Interventions Individual Counseling FBA/BIP Teach, Reinforce, and Prevent (TRP) Assessment-based Intense, durable procedures 1-5% Tier 2: Strategic Interventions Students not responding to core curriculum Reading: Soar to Success, Leap Frog, CRISS strategies, CCC Lab Math: Extended Day Writing: Small Group, CRISS strategies, and “Just Write Narrative” by K. Robinson Tier 2: Targeted Group Interventions Some students (at-risk) Small Group Counseling Parent Training (Behavior & Academic) Bullying Prevention Program FBA/BIP Classroom Management Techniques, Professional Development Small Group Parent Training ,Data 5-10% Tier 1: Core Curriculum All students Reading: Houghton Mifflin Math: Harcourt Writing: Six Traits Of Writing Learning Focus Strategies Tier 1: Universal Interventions All settings, all students Committee, Preventive, proactive strategies School Wide Rules/ Expectations Positive Reinforcement System (Tickets & 200 Club) School Wide Consequence System School Wide Social Skills Program, Data (Discipline, Surveys, etc.) Professional Development (behavior) Classroom Management Techniques,Parent Training 80-90% Students

Tiers of Service Delivery 1. Problem Identification- What’s the problem? Tier I Tier II Tier III 4. Response to Intervention- Is it working? 2. Problem Analysis- Why is it occurring? A combination of the problem solving process circle and the concentric tiers. Clearer labels for the tiers. 3. Intervention Design/Implementation- What are we going to do about it? 26

Implications for Activities at Various Tiers More Less Instructional Time Applicable evidence-based interventions Measurement Frequency Measurement Precision Group Size Measurement Focus Depth of Problem Analysis Primary point here is that we have far more base of evidence for Tier One and standard protocol interventions than we do for individual student interventions. Thus, our evidence base, when intervening with particularly idiosyncratic individuals, is our progress monitoring or response to intervention data. So, if the research base relating to an individual’s specific difficulty is sparse, we have to create our own evidence of effectiveness through careful progress monitoring. 27 Less More 27

Problem Solving A systematic and structured process that uses the skills of professionals from different disciplines to develop, implement, and evaluate intervention plans that result in the significant improvement (closing the gap) of student performance

The PS/RtI Relationship Multiple Levels of PS: State District School Grade Level Classroom Student PS occurs continually during all tiers of the RtI model

Step 1 – Problem Identification: What is the problem? To identify a problem, you need to start with three pieces of data Expected level of performance Student level of performance Peer level of performance Is this an individual student problem or a larger systemic problem?

Problem ID Peers Expectation Student % compliance weeks 31 This and the two slides following. Revised the y-axis to reflect 0% to 100% and labeled the behavior being measured as ‘compliance’ and the x-axis as ‘weeks’ weeks 31

Problem ID Expectation Peers Student % compliance weeks 32 See previous slide Student weeks 32

Problem ID Expectation Peers Student % compliance weeks 33 See previous slide Student weeks 33

Step 2 - Problem Analysis: Why is it occurring? The development of hypotheses about probable causes for the identified problem Assessment data are collected to validate hypotheses Why is replacement behavior not occurring?

Problem Analysis The problem is occurring because ________________. If ____________ would occur, the problem would be reduced.

Step 2 - Problem Analysis: Why is it occurring? RIOT by ICEL DOMAINS R Review I Interview O Observe T Test Instruction C Curriculum E Environment L Learner Teams should not be LIMITED by what is on this paper— Review line by line (ICELxRIOT)…

Step 3 – Intervention Design: What are we going to do about it? Effective teaching strategies consider both what to teach and how to teach it. Making good decisions will increase student progress. It is critical that the instruction be matched to the problem. Howell & Nolet, 2000

Step 3 – Intervention Design: What are we going to do about it? Match intervention type and intensity to student(s), setting, problem Interventions must focus on teaching desired behavior Select evidence-based interventions that match context of school/classroom culture Provide support for implementation Coaching Evaluation of implementation integrity What are we going to do about it? Make sure interventions are cumulative, not separate What is the plan for addressing behavior concerns pro-actively? i.e. Look at data early in the year and assess trends frequently thereafter??

Step 4 – Progress Monitoring: Is it working? Making instructional / intervention decisions based on review and analysis of student data Progress monitoring always includes graphing Goal Classroom Intervention I Classroom Intervention 2 39

Response to Intervention Goal Classroom Intervention Positive Questionable Performance Expected Rate Poor Observed Rate Time 40

Application Issues: Challenges - Data Collection What is collected and who collects it? How frequently is it collected? Organization Disaggregated by grade, gender, race, language, SES? Designed to answer specific questions (Tier 1/2 effectiveness?

Application Issues: Challenges - Data Management Technology is imperative AIMS-WEB, Wireless Generation Local Programs Display-necessary to evaluate RtI Goals/Benchmarks Aimline Trendline Rate

Application Issues: Challenges - Integrating Tiers Tier 1 (Core) instruction present at all three levels Purpose of Tier 2 is to improve success in Tier 1 Purpose of Tier 3 is to improve success in Tier 2 Is there a single “intervention” plan made up of different Tier services?

Application Issues: Challenges - Intervention Support Intervention plans should be developed based on student need and skills of staff All intervention plans should have intervention support Principals should ensure that intervention plans have intervention support Teachers should not be expected to implement plans for which there is no support

Need for Systems Change PS/RtI is not another project or program PS/RtI represents a new way of thinking about how we educate all students PS/RtI represents a New Way of Work Implementation of a PS/RtI model requires major systemic change

Change Model Consensus Infrastructure Implementation

Stages of Implementing Problem-Solving/RtI Consensus Belief is shared Vision is agreed upon Implementation requirements understood Infrastructure Development Regulations Training/Technical Assistance Model (e.g., Standard Protocol) Tier I and II intervention systems E.g., K-3 Academic Support Plan Data Management Technology support Decision-making criteria established Implementation

The Process of Systems Change Until, and unless, Consensus (understanding the need and trusting in the support) is reached no support will exist to establish the Infrastructure. Until, and unless, the Infrastructure is in place Implementation will not take place. A fatal error is to attempt Implementation without Consensus and Infrastructure Leadership must come both from all levels

What changes need to occur? Beliefs Knowledge Skills

Beliefs Making the shift to a new paradigm, like PS/RtI, does not simply involve accepting a new set of skills. It also involves giving up certain beliefs in favor of others. PS/RtI requires systemic change in the way we educate all students Ken Howell

Beliefs Student performance is influenced most by the quality of the interventions we deliver and how well we deliver them- not preconceived notions about child characteristics Decisions are best made with data Our expectations for student performance should be dependent on a student’s response to intervention, not on the basis of a “score” that “predicts” what they are “capable” of doing.

Beliefs Every student is everybody’s responsibility PSM/RtI is a General Education Initiative-Not Special Education Improving the effectiveness of core instruction is basic to this process NO Child Left Behind Really Means “NO” Assessment (data) should both inform and evaluate the impact of instruction Policies must be consistent with beliefs Beliefs must be supported by research Focus on alterable variables

Knowledge The Problem-Solving method The relationship between RtI and the Problem-Solving method Empirically validated instructional practices in the general education classroom at Tiers 1, 2, & 3 Importance and methods of assessing instructional quality Adapted from Response to Intervention, NASDSE, 2006

Knowledge (cont’d) Determining appropriate interventions based upon student data Difference between the intensity of a problem and the severity The role of progress monitoring State and Federal Statutes & Regulations Critical factors in systems change Small Group Planning and Problem-Solving Techniques

Change Educators will embrace new ideas when two conditions exist: They understand the NEED for the idea They perceive that they either have the SKILLS to implement the idea OR they have the SUPPORT to develop the skills

So, What Skills are Necessary? Assessing impact of instruction/intervention - academic & behavior (CBM, DIBELS, classroom observations, etc.) Use of technology to manage, display, and disseminate assessment data Interpreting assessment data to determine instructional impact Data based decision making (when to continue, modify, or change instruction/intervention) Adapted from Response to Intervention, NASDSE, 2006

Skills (cont’d) Data based decision making (what modifications or changes) Data based decision making (eligibility) Collaboration Communication Small Group Planning and Problem-Solving

Florida’s PS/RtI Project Co-Directors George Batsche - Batsche@tempest.coedu.usf.edu Mike Curtis - Curtis@tempest.coedu.usf.edu Project Leader Clark Dorman - Dorman@coedu.usf.edu Regional Coordinators /Trainers Beth Hardcastle - North - Hardcast@coedu.usf.edu Kelly Justice - South - Justice@coedu.usf.edu Project Evaluators Connie Hines – Hines@tempest.coedu.usf.edu Jose Castillo - Castillo@coedu.usf.edu Staff Assistant Stevi Schermond - Schermon@coedu.usf.edu

Brief Project Description Two purposes of PS/RtI Project: Statewide training in PS/RtI Evaluate the impact of PS/RtI on district, building, and student outcomes via demonstration districts

Statewide Training Sites

Mini-Grant Application District and Pilot Schools Commitment District, Pilot, and Comparison Schools Demographic Data Statement of Need and Objectives District and Pilot Schools Experience with Initiatives and Programs District Personnel Resources and Technology

Mini-Grant Demonstration Sites I. Services Provided to Demonstration Sites by Statewide Project Staff Funding for up to two Coaches Training, T/A for Coaches & Building Administrators Training, T/A for School-based Teams T/A in use of Technology and Data

Mini-Grant Demonstration Sites II. Expectations of Demonstration Districts and Pilot Sites - Collaboration between General Ed, Special Ed, and other projects People with expertise - district and school level teams Funds/Resources - evidenced based instruction and intervention, Professional Development - support and attend Policies and Procedures Technology/Data Systems Making changes when the data indicate

Mini-Grant Demonstration Sites III. Funding Up to $100,000 per year - three year maximum To support employment of district-based coaches and training activities Three year commitment - reapply annually Years two and three contingent upon fulfillment of expectations during previous year

Demonstration Districts

Response to Intervention Final Thoughts Problem Solving & Response to Intervention